WootBot

Poll: Marijuana will be legal at the federal level in the United States:

10.6% - Within two years269

28.7% - Within five years729

30.3% - Within 10 years768

11.3% - Within 20 years288

19.1% - Never484

2538 votes

Well, how do you fare compared to the Zeitgeist?
Chat up your fellow wooters and let us know how lame this poll was or what obvious choices we missed.
For example: Was this poll a) STUPID, b) DUMB, c) POINTLESS or d) ALL OF THE ABOVE?

berlinvogel

I've never smoked it, and I believe it should be legal. If alcohol is legal then pot should be legal. End of discussion. It's 100 times safer than booze. You're going to have the same social problems as alcohol, but bottom line is that I'm willing to pay for it....not like tax revenues will supersede and cover all of them. Legalize and liberalize mutha crackas!!!!!

berlinvogel

yoh2241

berlinvogel wrote:I've never smoked it, and I believe it should be legal. If alcohol is legal then pot should be legal. End of discussion. It's 100 times safer than booze. You're going to have the same social problems as alcohol, but bottom line is that I'm willing to pay for it....not like tax revenues will supersede and cover all of them. Legalize and liberalize mutha crackas!!!!!

You forgot to mention cigarettes, which are much more harmful. However, the cigarette market is already extremely large and helps the country economically by keeping money moving, and the government probably couldn't stop the cigarette market either since it would probably end up like alcohol during the Prohibition era. Marijuana on the other hand can be used to treat many medical disorders. The effects of marijuana are not known extremely well since it was made illegal so no research could be conducted on its effects for a long time.

lothariorowe

Answers will be posted tomorrow (to give everyone some time to ponder these questions).

Racism, racism, and racism!

It's all about those white women getting seduced by black guys who play the devil's music, jazz. Ainslinger, or whatever that congressman's name was, wasn't he in charge of alcohol prohibition, and then when alcohol was re-legalized, he kept his job by creating and heading up the DEA to demonize any other substance he could convince the people of? Complete scum - literally was made illegal due to the use by black people, and like 80 years later, the same law is still on the books. Awesome.

People should be able to do whatever they want so long as they don't harm others. Oh wait...that would mean no government wouldn't it? The whole "lock peaceful people in cages if they don't give us some of their money we call taxes." I guess the whole idea of government would violate the "do whatever you want so long as you don't harm others" principle then, wouldn't it...

But I guess it's just better to do whatever people before us did and never try to think for yourself or change the system too drastically...that's how America was formed right?

daftblight

Pretty much have to just wait out the old people that currently vote and have power to die. Once the mid 30s and under set start get old enough to hold the majority of the power we might start seeing a shift in policy. Its already starting to trickle out in some states and even Holder seems to be going that way to some degree with his talk of drug sentencing reform.

lotsofgoats

hawkm7 wrote:The Government makes too much money off marijuana being illegal. It will never be totally legalized.

The government loses an absurd amount of money off of marijuana being illegal. Sending a ridiculously disproportionate number of young black males to prison for carrying small amounts of pot isn't exactly a cheap proposition and doesn't exactly make communities productive.

As far as "figuring out how to tax it", you figure they'll probably just... tax it. Just like they tax any other commodity, really.

bbkf

yoh2241 wrote:You forgot to mention cigarettes, which are much more harmful. However, the cigarette market is already extremely large and helps the country economically by keeping money moving, and the government probably couldn't stop the cigarette market either since it would probably end up like alcohol during the Prohibition era. Marijuana on the other hand can be used to treat many medical disorders. The effects of marijuana are not known extremely well since it was made illegal so no research could be conducted on its effects for a long time.

tobacco is not nearly as harmful as marijuana. It's about ten fold less harmful. There are way more carcinogens in marijuana than tobacco. The effects of THC are more debilitating than nicotine.

The only "medical" use for marijuana is recreational use!

Don't get me wrong, I love the stuff and I fully support it's legalization. I think people need to stop lying to themselves and others by claiming that it's beneficial to health or the economy.

tapoutnc

We are losing to China based on intellect. We cannot afford to have more pot smoking minorities with their hands out asking for their free Obama phones. We will be China's cake is a lie if things do not turn around. If you can argue that I am incorrect, you have not been doing your own homework.

bbkf

Answers will be posted tomorrow (to give everyone some time to ponder these questions).

the rise of mormonism was growing in the early 1900s. Christians were afraid of losing members and most importantly money. Mormons were forced out of the country and went to mexico. when they came back they brought marijuana back with them.

When prohibition started people were looking for other ways to 'enjoy life'. marijuana made it's way from Utah to NY.

myfester

lotsofgoats wrote:As far as "figuring out how to tax it", you figure they'll probably just... tax it. Just like they tax any other commodity, really.

Not really, because unlike tobacco a and alcohol which takes a lot of equipment, land and knowledge, marijuana can be grown in small quantities at home and if you do that and sell to friends, etc...government doesn't know about it, therefore not making money off it. They don't like that.

bbkf

myfester wrote:Not really, because unlike tobacco a and alcohol which takes a lot of equipment, land and knowledge, marijuana can be grown in small quantities at home and if you do that and sell to friends, etc...government doesn't know about it, therefore not making money off it. They don't like that.

RKett

It's all about those white women getting seduced by black guys who play the devil's music, jazz. Ainslinger, or whatever that congressman's name was, wasn't he in charge of alcohol prohibition, and then when alcohol was re-legalized, he kept his job by creating and heading up the DEA to demonize any other substance he could convince the people of? Complete scum - literally was made illegal due to the use by black people, and like 80 years later, the same law is still on the books. Awesome.

People should be able to do whatever they want so long as they don't harm others. Oh wait...that would mean no government wouldn't it? The whole "lock peaceful people in cages if they don't give us some of their money we call taxes." I guess the whole idea of government would violate the "do whatever you want so long as you don't harm others" principle then, wouldn't it...

But I guess it's just better to do whatever people before us did and never try to think for yourself or change the system too drastically...that's how America was formed right?

Ok ok, my rant is over. For now.

Yeah, that's interesting, but incorrect. Marijauna or hemp was made illegal in the 30's because Randolph Hearst had a monopoly on the paper industry, paper used for his newspapers. He lobbied congress to get marijuana banned to prevent his competitors from gaining a foothold. The black devil, satan music crap was just the excuse they used to terrify white folks inot voting against its use. You can almost always trace these things back to money, who stands to gain or lose.

psycold

bbkf wrote:tobacco is not nearly as harmful as marijuana. It's about ten fold less harmful. There are way more carcinogens in marijuana than tobacco. The effects of THC are more debilitating than nicotine.

The only "medical" use for marijuana is recreational use!

Don't get me wrong, I love the stuff and I fully support it's legalization. I think people need to stop lying to themselves and others by claiming that it's beneficial to health or the economy.

HAH. I think you need to do more research because Marijuana is remarkably NOT dangerous. Go watch the documentary called, "The Union: The Business Behind Getting High" and see a Harvard medical professor tell you how there is not a single death in the entire recorded history of mankind from cannabis use alone. The fact that someone could convince you that cigarettes are actually less dangerous really blows my mind.

cleverlyc

Old people vote much more regularly than young people, so it won't be legal until the Baby Boomers' parents are all gone. When the first Boomers hit 85, is my guess.

It's not about voting, though you have a point. It's about a federal agency run amok (DEA and ONDCP) that have declared something they have no business eclaring, that cannabis has ZERO medical applications, that is a requirement for Schedule I status. As the government ALSO holds the first PATENT for a medical use for cannabis, it's own position is completely devoid of fact, yet NO ONE has found a way to mandate they follow their own rules (they even recently 'reviewed' cannabis' status, and declared it unchanged).

40% of the states in the country have legalized it for at LEAST medical use, and yet the DEA and ONDCP soldier on, blissfully ignorant of their own untenable positions (or perhaps they are aware, and are simply riding the gravy train until it goes off the rails, which better be dang soon).

Alcohol and tobacco are orders of magnitude more dangerous for society, yet they remain legal, as cannabis remain verboten.

And government folks wonder why the people no longer believe in them....?

cleverlyc

bbkf wrote:tobacco is not nearly as harmful as marijuana. It's about ten fold less harmful. There are way more carcinogens in marijuana than tobacco. The effects of THC are more debilitating than nicotine.

Patently untrue. Absolutely false. While it is true that cannabis contains a larger quantity of carcinogens, it is NOT true that it leads to cancer or death (why are you parroting disproven DEA claims?!). In fact cannabis seems to have strong ANTI-cancer qualities.

Not that anyone could study it in America (OR elsewhere), because to do so would bring down the wrath of the DEA and ONDCP.

theman1015

There Is OneFactor Missing In The Argument Of Alcohol Is Just As Bad. ThatBeing That The Thc In Weed Will Stay In Your System AndEffect Every Cognitive Decision ThatIs Made By The Person Who Smoked For A Multiple Weeks To Come.

vegassmitty

theman1015

There Is OneFactor Missing In The Argument Of Alcohol Is Just As Bad. ThatBeing That The Thc In Weed Will Stay In Your System AndEffect Every Cognitive Decision ThatIs Made By The Person Who Smoked For A Multiple Weeks To Come.

workinpoor

bbkf wrote:tobacco is not nearly as harmful as marijuana. It's about ten fold less harmful. There are way more carcinogens in marijuana than tobacco. The effects of THC are more debilitating than nicotine.

True, perhaps, but who sits down and smokes a pack of joints in an evening? I've been known to kill a pack of cigarettes while playing cards at a friends house on a weekend evening (not these days, but once upon a time). Most pot smokers I know might do a Jane or two and that's it (mostly because they don't have the energy!).

bbkf wrote: ... people need to stop lying to themselves and others by claiming that it's beneficial to health or the economy.

Completely agree with this statement.

The thing I fear the most about its legalization is this: when folks who partake are freed from the scrutiny that keeps them firing up mostly in their own homes, they may start taking their habit on the road--upping the numbers of impaired drivers in this category of DUI, around whom other drivers will have to negotiate.

bbkf

psycold wrote:HAH. I think you need to do more research because Marijuana is remarkably NOT dangerous. Go watch the documentary called, "The Union: The Business Behind Getting High" and see a Harvard medical professor tell you how there is not a single death in the entire recorded history of mankind from cannabis use alone. The fact that someone could convince you that cigarettes are actually less dangerous really blows my mind.

just because no one has ever died from THC poisoning does not make it safer.

i really don't want to argue that cigarettes are safer because smoking ANYTHING is not safe.

darkchylde13

I just really wish that people didn't feel the need to get drunk or high to feel good or live their lives. There's something about the fact that you can't enjoy your life without resorting to those things that makes me really sad. It's like you need some sort of crutch to get through your day. And just to be straight up honest, all the people that I have personally known that were pot smokers, were either a) really stupid, or b) really poor decision makers, often both. Not a personal attack on anyone, just a genuine personal observation. Now whether the marijuana made them that way, or they already were that way, and that's why they chose to start using, I cannot say... Anyway, I think the biggest problem I have with marijuana is that it seems to make many people feel ok with not succeeding, with not accomplishing anything. And when you feel ok with that, there is no longer a reason to strive for success or work hard, this in turn brings the economy down, and therefore hurts everyone. Again this is just what I personally have seen, without exception, from the people I have known. I would imagine that it affects other people this way as well. I honestly think that people shouldn't smoke cigarettes or drink either, they all affect people in a negative way, and just because you can claim that something is better than something else, still doesn't make it good, just less bad. Getting punched is better than getting stabbed, that doesn't make getting punched good...

bbkf

The thing I fear the most about its legalization is this: when folks who partake are freed from the scrutiny that keeps them firing up mostly in their own homes, they may start taking their habit on the road--upping the numbers of impaired drivers in this category of DUI, around whom other drivers will have to negotiate.

I've believed that the reason marijuana is not legal is because there is no road side sobriety test for it. If there was a "breathalizer" for THC....

bbkf

cleverlyc wrote:Patently untrue. Absolutely false. While it is true that cannabis contains a larger quantity of carcinogens, it is NOT true that it leads to cancer or death (why are you parroting disproven DEA claims?!). In fact cannabis seems to have strong ANTI-cancer qualities.

Not that anyone could study it in America (OR elsewhere), because to do so would bring down the wrath of the DEA and ONDCP.

so if it has never been studied, then why did you make the claim that it has anti-cancer qualities?

Woot.com is operated by Woot Services LLC.
Products on Woot.com are sold by Woot, Inc., other than items on Wine.Woot which are sold by the seller specified on the product detail page.
Product narratives are for entertainment purposes and frequently employ
literary point of view;
the narratives do not express Woot's editorial opinion.
Aside from literary abuse, your use of this site also subjects you to Woot's
terms of use
and
privacy policy.
Woot may designate a user comment as a Quality Post, but that doesn't mean we agree with or guarantee anything said or linked to in that post.